'The Price Of Inequality'

Discussion in 'Economy' started by midcan5, Oct 30, 2012.

  1. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,793
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    'American exceptionalism,' is that an ironic slogan or a clever cover?

    In the past thirty years, since the so called Reagan revolution, inequality in America has grown. And yet even today among the haves and the have nots this fact is lost in propaganda. The chart at link shows the place inequality leads.

    Chart of the day: the price of inequality


    "Great inequality is the scourge of modern societies. We provide the evidence on each of eleven different health and social problems: physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being. For all eleven of these health and social problems, outcomes are very substantially worse in more unequal societies." Richard Wilkinson/Kate Pickett The Evidence in Detail | The Equality Trust

    .
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  2. expat_panama
    Offline

    expat_panama Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,461
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +253
    Seriously, saying (for example) life expectancy is worse now than 30 years ago --all because of Reagan--






    Crazy. Absolutely bonkers.
     
  3. midcan5
    Offline

    midcan5 liberal / progressive

    Joined:
    Jun 4, 2007
    Messages:
    10,793
    Thanks Received:
    2,367
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Philly, PA
    Ratings:
    +3,306
    Since Reagan - one could argue it started before - not because of one person. Reading isn't your strong suit, nor is thought.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/30/b...m-by-donald-l-barlett-and-james-b-steele.html


    "Nearly 13 million American children live in families with incomes below the federal poverty level, which is $20,000 a year for a family of four. The number of children living in poverty increased by more than 11 percent between 2000 and 2005. There are 1.3 million more children living in poverty today than in 2000, despite indications of economic recovery and growth." NCCP | Who are America’s Poor Children?


    "Rector and Sheffield are right that we shouldn't take our society's material progress for granted. But the trouble with this line of reasoning is that Americans today don't live in the 1890s or another bygone era. And they generally don't reside in the bush of Botswana or some other impoverished land, either.

    As is customary for humans, Americans inhabit a particular space and time. They live in communities and need access to the resources that will help them participate fully in those communities. This means they need basics, such as a decent-paying job, health insurance and retirement security. At present it also often means needing cell phones, computers and reliable cars.

    The biblical social ethic reflects this sense of particularity. The Jewish prophets and Jesus were not bowled over by the fact that the poor of their times lived large compared to the cavemen. They spoke precisely against the marginalization of economically disadvantaged people within their social contexts." Relative poverty: Where Adam Smith and the Bible agree | The Christian Century
     
  4. expat_panama
    Offline

    expat_panama Silver Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2011
    Messages:
    2,461
    Thanks Received:
    252
    Trophy Points:
    98
    Ratings:
    +253
    From the the Census Bur.:

    Table 104. Expectation of Life at Birth, 1970 to 2008, and Projections
    1080......73.7
    2010......78.3
    So which is it, Reagan extended people's lives, or better maybe Reagan had nothing to do with all this stuff amounting to little more than a silly doom'n'gloom rant.
     
  5. EdwardBaiamonte
    Offline

    EdwardBaiamonte Gold Member

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2011
    Messages:
    27,571
    Thanks Received:
    1,130
    Trophy Points:
    205
    Ratings:
    +3,053
    so then eliminate the pure stupidity liberalism

    1) with no fault divorce, feminism, abortion, and welfare liberals have destroyed the American family and created millions of single mothers living on the liberal dole and also millions of young men with no need to work!!


    2) at the same time you have liberal unions shipping 30 million jobs off shore with their high prices

    3) and at the same time you have huge liberal debt so the Chinese and others can buy that debt with their dollars rather than buy our products

    4) oh and lets not forget that liberals let in 10 million illegals to take jobs that would have gone to Americans
     
  6. Rshermr
    Offline

    Rshermr VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2012
    Messages:
    5,804
    Thanks Received:
    287
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Location:
    LaConner, WA
    Ratings:
    +855
    Oh, ed. You must get yourself under control. I know you have been told to post this con dogma. I know you believe it is your job. And I know you have no idea of what it means to post proof of anything you have been told to post. Because, of course, you are delusional. We all understand it is not your fault. Just works out that way. You really need to read and understand these studies:


    Stupid con studies:
    Brock University Study Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice | Racism, Bias & Politics | Right-Wing and Left-Wing Ideology | LiveScience

    U of Arkansas study Study “Proves” Conservatism Linked To Stupidity - The Ulsterman Report

    British Cohort study Right-wingers are less intelligent than left wingers, says controversial study - and conservative politics can lead people to be racist | Mail Online

    LiveScience study Social conservatives have a lower I.Q.? (probably) | Gene Expression | Discover Magazine

    Watching Fox makes you stupid Study: Watching Fox News Actually Makes You Stupid | Jillian Rayfield | Politics News | Rolling Stone
     
  7. BillSPrestonEsq
    Offline

    BillSPrestonEsq Rookie

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2012
    Messages:
    33
    Thanks Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +2
    If you look at the growth of size and scope of the government over the past century, you'll see what the problem is. If the size of government decreased over a period of time and things got increasingly worse as you say they have, you could blame the downsizing of the government right? Well why is it that when we have the opposite happen do many people still believe that an even larger more powerful government will SOLVE the problem? You look at Reagan and all his talk of smaller government. He is just like the republicans of today, they preach of smaller government but never make any significant changes. I understand why you would side with the democratic party. Democrats are dipicted by the media as more caring, compassionate, against war and for personal freedoms and equality. If you look more carefully at the outcome of many of these supposed attempts at equality, or at the regulation of business to improve quality or equality for labor you will see that these policies have an opposite effect. Small government and truly free markets (unlike those we have today) give to people their best chance at equality.

    You'll see if you look at the history of government programs such as USDA for example and their farm loans program early in the agency's lifetime, or at their regulations, redtape and subsidies you will see the government is responsible for monopolies in food production. You will also see they have created a decline in afican american farmers. Also a reduction in quality of foods available, including locally grown organic produce and meats. You could look at the history of almost any industry and see how government regulations have created a void of competition in our markets, this includes labor markets. The inequality this creates leads to the rising cost of welfare, whether it be food stamps, public housing, telephones, etc.. and what good do these programs really do? How about the generations that grow up under the hand of the government that stop relying on themselves? It seems that we are on the road to socialism and we know that socialism has produced some of the worst living conditions in the past century. I agree we have a problem with inequality in this country and I know that government invervention is not the answer.
     
  8. Mr. H.
    Offline

    Mr. H. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    44,117
    Thanks Received:
    9,265
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    A warm place with no memory.
    Ratings:
    +15,395
    I've lived through so many "have- have not" times in my life, I've lost count.
    Lived below the poverty level with a child too. And this time next year who knows, I may be broke again. I could give a shit.

    Yet I never felt "inequal". And it's never been a "scourge".

    Difficult? Fuck yes. Insurmountable? Hell no.

    Poverty doesn't frighten me. I grew up in it. Without free cell phones, EBT cards, or the plethora of social safety nets we have today.

    Throughout the roller coaster ride of rags/riches/rags/riches there have been two constants:

    "Do not flaunt what you have, and do not covet what others have".

    In my opinion, it is the Liberal agenda that has created the stigma of economic inequality. I didn't say economic inequality itself... I'm talking about the stigma that is so associated.

    For generations, my family has grappled with most of these so-called "11 health and social problems" physical health, mental health, drug abuse, education, imprisonment, obesity, social mobility, trust and community life, violence, teenage births, and child well-being.

    Well, except obesity. Maybe it's the metabolism. :D

    And through it all, we have been conservatives. Why? Because of the two constants.

    I can not for the life of me understand why anyone with wealth and riches would flaunt, parade, wave, point, or belittle. Yet I see it all around me and it really makes me sick.

    Conversely, I also don't understand why anyone afflicted with the "11" would consider themselves victims of scourge or inequal to anyone.

    Deal with it. Regale in silence... suffer in silence. As I have.
     
  9. C_Clayton_Jones
    Online

    C_Clayton_Jones Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2011
    Messages:
    41,543
    Thanks Received:
    8,933
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    In a Republic, actually
    Ratings:
    +23,869
    Most conservative will argue, of course, that this is an ‘appropriate price’ to pay for our relative prosperity. Most conservatives also perceive the specter of poverty as an effective ‘incentive’ to compel citizens to be successful.

    The Social Darwinism of the right is alive and well.
     
  10. Quantum Windbag
    Offline

    Quantum Windbag Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    58,308
    Thanks Received:
    5,014
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Ratings:
    +5,221
    Most Americans understand that those 13 million Americans are better off than hundreds of millions of people in China. The really smart ones know that you can't eliminate poverty through government decree.

    Then we have Bono, who knows that everything he learned in school about how evil capitalism is a lie.

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/parmyol...-realizations-about-aid-capitalism-and-nerds/
     
    Last edited: Nov 1, 2012

Share This Page